I am mulling the idea of building a trailer with a walking beam axel. I had 4 construction trailers with these axels and they work great over uneven ground. The local fab shop built them with a heavy pipe stub welded into the beam that fit snug into the cross trailer axel tube with zerk fittings to grease. Over many years we did have some wear and replacement of the axel parts. I would like to use a cross tube with spindles welded each end and larger sleeves in the beam and have graphite impregnated plastic bushings of some type turned to fit. I have used this type of bushing in other applications and they held up very well. Problem is there will be sideways torque from the offset wheels and turning due to the dual wheels. Wondering if anyone has any experience in this type of setup? Possible gross weight of 2 ton. The aim is to have simple maintainance--just a replaceable bushing.

cj737 wrote:Another option would be to use sealed roller bearings for zero maintenance (just wear) in lieu of greased bearings.

Is there a particular reason that you require a full length axle versus using two independent spindles to simply support the wheels? This might alleviate your differential travel issues altogether-

I think you misunderstand. Yes, it's a solid axle, but with a spindle on each end so tires rotate independently. The question at hand is torque between two sets of wheels. Picture a semi-trailer backing in a jack-knife turn. Tires aren't just rolling, they're sliding sideways on the ground relative to their path.

In the end, tapered roller bearings are the best way to deal with the thrust load imposed in a tight turn. I do not like greased bearings (as a tandem axle boat trailer), for the maintenance issues listed. If the hubs will not be submerged, I prefer an oil-filled hub with the hub end serving as a sight glass for oil level/color/condition. Buy Timken bearings, not the Chinese knock-offs. Use either 50-weight synthetic transmission fluid, or Lucas Hub Oil (preferred), this stuff:http://lucasoil.com/products/heavy-duty ... as-hub-oilavailable at O-Reilly's and others.The trailers I use this system on weigh 46000 pound empty and log 200K miles on average between PM service, and 1M miles between overhauls, whether they need it or not.

cj737 wrote:Another option would be to use sealed roller bearings for zero maintenance (just wear) in lieu of greased bearings.

Is there a particular reason that you require a full length axle versus using two independent spindles to simply support the wheels? This might alleviate your differential travel issues altogether-

I think you misunderstand. Yes, it's a solid axle, but with a spindle on each end so tires rotate independently. The question at hand is torque between two sets of wheels. Picture a semi-trailer backing in a jack-knife turn. Tires aren't just rolling, they're sliding sideways on the ground relative to their path.Steve S

Not really. I am proposing eliminating the "axle" and using torsion suspension, and independent spindles only. Matters not in the end really, the primary question is about bearings and I think we agree on avoiding greased bearings.

Thanks for the feedback. This is just a light trailer -low miler and as usual I try to adhere to the K.I.S.S. principal. The single tube cross axel would have a single spindle on each end to carry the walking beam . I saw videos of atv .buggys with a similar idea except again tube in tube beam rotation bearings where I would like the easily maintained bushing type if feasible. I had similar bushings installed in the outer cable pullys on a 10 ton crane and they showed no wear for years. Of course that was straight loading without a torque loading as in this axel.